Everyone seems to be focusing on Arizona's new immigration law. The Obama administration has filed a federal lawsuit. Here in Utah, the Salt Lake City Police Chief and the state's Attorney General have spoken out against it and against Utah lawmakers enacting a similar law. However, the law basically exists in Rhode Island and has already been upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.
I do not write this to try to support any position, but to defend democracy. Wow, that sounds way too strong. How about to defend truth? Still too strong? Let me answer that, yes. How about I steal the Tom Cruise line from A Few Good Men, "I want the truth." Most people are not just on one side or the other on the issue of illegal immigration - they are all over the board on it. They may side with one point of view, but then have their own point a view to mix in with it. The bottom line is some are using bad information, or scare tactics or twisted facts to try to persuade people to their side. Some want to push aside the will of the people, some want to push aside every illegal immigrant and some want to try to push the law aside.
I submit that we better make sure we are making decisions based on facts and the reality of the situation and not half the story. Arizona is believed to be the epicenter and yet little Rhode Island has already fought the battle.
Rhode Island police have been checking immigration status - basically the same procedure Arizona will put in place on July 29th - for years. The Boston Globe-Democrat wrote the following - "From Woonsocket to Westerly, the troopers patrolling the nation's smallest state are reporting all illegal immigrants they encounter, even on routine stops such as speeding, to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement."
The National Review wrote - "Even liberal Providence, where politicians long opposed any local enforcement efforts, changed its policy in 2008... Rhode Island cops now routinely contact ICE when they suspect they've come across an illegal immigrant. Since 2006, the number of contacts they've made to ICE's Law Enforcement Support Center in Vermont has nearly doubled."
And the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Muehler v. Mena that police can question someone about their immigration status. And that ruling went on to say police who did ask the question did not violate the 4th amendment of the Constitution. So, why is Arizona being sued by the federal government? Why is the Rhode Island policy not being reported?
The background on this case is that Iris Mena was handcuffed while police searched her home for weapons. During this search an officer asked her about her immigration status. She sued and a judge said that the police had indeed violated her rights and had no business asking an immigration question and no business handcuffing her during the search for weapons.
However, when the case got to the Supreme Court the justices voted 9-0 in favor of police. Let's break that down. 9-0 on that right to handcuff Mena while they did a search and 9-0 on the right of police to ask about immigration status. I ask again, why is Arizona being sued and blasted by so many if the high court has already upheld basically what the Grand Canyon state wants to do?
My point is - instead of people yelling and screaming about illegal immigrants, let's be careful and correct as possible - let's not withhold information for the sake of "our side." We don't know all the facts, but we certainly shouldn't ignore what we do know.
